There are new proposed gun control laws in the aftermath of the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newton, Connecticut that occurred on December 14th, 2012. This incident claimed the lives of twenty 1st graders and six adults and has set the government in motion to try to prevent future acts of violence by strengthening gun control laws in the United States (Smith). This has been a topic that has been an extremely emotional debate with people on both sides unwilling to compromise. Gun advocates and critics of the new proposed gun laws argue that these new laws infringe on our constitutional right to bear arms; however, the new laws do not take away that right, they simply add minor restrictions in the search to put an end to gun violence. With the rise in gun violence today, we need to take some sort of action.

If we look at the history of gun control in the United States, we find that laws concerning gun control are not anything new; in fact, the first federal gun control law was the National Firearms Act of 1934. This law imposed a restrictive two hundred dollar tax on the manufacture or sale of machine guns and sawed-off shotguns. Also, all sales of these weapons were to be documented in a national registry (The Long). Then in 1968, a new law passed. This was the Gun Control Act of 1968 and it was the first major gun control law in America. It prohibited certain people from being able to purchase firearms including convicted felons, fugitives, minors, individuals with a history of mental illness, dishonorable discharged veterans, expatriates and illegal aliens (Riczo). This law also expanded licensing requirements to more firearms dealers and ordered more detailed records of sales (The Long).

Continuing on gun control laws throughout American history, the Brady Handgun Violence Protection Act of 1993 established background checks for gun purchasers. This law was passed to insure that no firearms would be sold to the people listed in the 1968 regulation. These background checks are required only on sales through licensed dealers, not on sales through unlicensed private sellers who do not sell firearms as a business, with the exception of certain states. Then in 1994, a ten year ban was placed on the production of nineteen listed new semi-automatic assault weapons with the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act. Some of these weapons that were banned include the AR-15, some versions of the AK-47, the Uzi, the MAC-10 and the TEC-9. Along with the banning of these assault rifles, large capacity ammunition magazines were limited to ten rounds. This ban was lifted in 2004 when it expired and attempts to reinstate this law failed (The Long).

Amidst these gun control laws that regulate firearm sales, there have been several laws that protect the rights of gun owners as well as gun dealers and manufacturers. The Firearm Owner’s Protection Act of 1986 was passed by Congress amid complaints that the government was abusing its power while enforcing gun control laws. This law restricts the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms from inspecting gun dealers more than once a year, unless multiple violations have been discovered. This law also prohibits the government from creating a national registry of gun ownership. In 2003, the Tiahrt Amendment was passed that forbids law enforcement from releasing information to the public as to where criminals purchased their firearms. Again in 2005, a law passed where gun manufacturers were granted immunity from civil lawsuits involving crimes with firearms; therefore, they would not be held accountable for the adverse effects of the weapons they manufacture. This law is called the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (The Long).

Looking at this history of gun control in the U.S., it is not such a stretch that...

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

...﻿ (Research Essay)
GunControl
A definition of guncontrol has different meanings to different people. A general statement is it is designed to restrict or limit the possession, production, importation, shipment, sale, and/or use of firearms (Wikipedia). There are many options including Assault rifle bans, large magazine clips ban, and criminal background checks. To a liberal who fears lifeless objects as being evil, it means walking on the bill of rights to assuage their fears, and avoiding or at least hampering the people, in their ability to lawfully keep and bear arms. To a person who believes in the right to keep and bear arms, it means a sharp eye, a steady hand. To a potential criminal it means it will be harder for them to purchase a gun legally. Whichever choice you choose it still affects the second amendment. The second ammendment is, a well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed upon. I think guncontrol should be limited to prevent felons from obtaining and better tracking of guns. But I think that every American that is not a felon should be able to carry a weapon and defend them. John Adams recognizes the fundamental right of citizens, as individuals, to defend themselves with arms, however he states militias must be controlled by...

...No to GunControl; Yes to the Second Amendment
The second amendment of the constitution states, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” (cornell.edu). The purpose of our founding fathers making this was to ensure the protection of the individual person. Banning semi-automatic weapons will have several negative effects on the well being of this country. The government cannot protect every individual from the evils of murder; murder that preys upon the defenseless. It is nearly impossible for a person to own a fully automatic weapon; therefore, banning semi-automatic weapons would merely take away the protection that citizens, according to the second amendment, have the right to own.
When law abiding citizens have lost their source of protection, the only owners of semi-automatic weapons will be criminals; criminals who do not follow the law; the law designed to protect those who follow it. The government will not be there when a murderer breaks into a house and kills a whole family because they were not allowed to own a gun. Different guncontrol policies all around the world will prove true that criminals are less likely to approach a person who most likely owns a gun themselves. Semi-automatic weapons should not be banned because removing guns will not stop the...

...ArgumentativeGunControl Paper
The issue of GunControl has been on the minds of humans for hundreds of years. How do we protect ourselves and our loved ones? How do we keep such a dangerous weapon out of the hands of the wrong person? Inside the Second Amendment we are granted the right to Bear Arms. Having that amendment gives each person the ability to carry a weapon if they choose, so how can we control who should or shouldn’t carry?
According to an article evaluated from Kovandizic and Marvell, each year in America we can see the most violent crimes have been committed using firearms. “In 2000 firearms were involved in 66% of homicides, 26% of robberies, 6% of aggravated assaults, and 8% of all violent crime victims faced attackers who were armed with a firearm.” (Cited: ProQuest, Right to carry article.) One could assume that with such high statistics, guns being in the wrong hands have led to high levels of violent crimes. There have been many reviews and studies assessing guncontrol effectiveness, however, they have provided little support that guncontrol laws reduce gun availability, or lower violence rates.
Some would say that the Regulation of guns is a necessary action that needs to be taken in order to save lives. A good definition of gun...

...GunControl:
If not now, when?
The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that gun for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. When it comes to protecting freedom, Americans, including those on the Supreme Court, recognize that personal liberties must often be modified for the safety and protection of others. Yet today’s gun rights advocates constantly cite the Second Amendment of the Constitution, the right to bear arms, when threatened by attempts to limit, but not eliminate, modern-day weapons. Piggybacking on this idea is our right to free speech; it is frequently regulated through obscenity and decency laws. Slander, libel, pornography; we are silenced all of the time. Our rights to assembly and religion are compromised in the process, however.
The debate over guncontrol continues to plague our country. On one side, there is the National Rifle Association (NRA) and 2nd Amendment-citing citizens who use their firearms for hunting and self-defense. On the other, there is the Handgun Control Inc. (HCI) and followers of the Brady Campaign who want to ban guns on the basis that they are dangerous. The Brady Administration passed a bill that requires individuals seeking to buy a gun at a licensed dealer pass a background check....

...﻿Lee Hanson
WR 122
Final Paper
Mary Bentson
7 June 2012
GunControl: Is it a Good Thing?
Contrary to what many people may have seen on bumper stickers, guncontrol does not refer to using two hands. The legal definition of guncontrol is: having laws that aim to restrict or regulate the sale, purchase, or possession of firearms through licensing, registration, or identification requirements. A large number of American households or residents, approximately 40-45% of them, own at least one firearm (Agresti, James, and Smith, Reid). No matter how you look at it guns have, and will always be, around; whether they are used in the military or for personal use. However, many people have lost interest in gun activities, such as hunting and target shooting, which has caused an overall lack of knowledge about firearms and a lack of respect for guns. As a result, some people believe that we need stricter guncontrol laws or they believe that guns should be eliminated from society because of all the crimes that are committed and all the accidents that occur each year, that involve guns. So the real question is, would banning guns from a society really reduce crime?
Australia serves as a perfect example of what happens when strict gun laws are enacted. As Andrea Petrie...

...issues incite Americans more than the issue of rising crime and violence. This problem can easily be linked to the availability of guns. “The debate over whether guns are a hallowed tradition and a right guaranteed by the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution or whether they are a fearful danger contributing to crime and violence." ("guncontrol") Due to the outbreak of violence in our society, some people feel that repealing the Second Amendment would solve the problem. These people feel that repealing the Second Amendment would solve the problem. These people feel that there are two reasons for the repeal; one is the rising of violence among teenagers, the second reason is their interpretation of the Second Amendment which could be considered a strict one. The side opposing these views use arguments like how it would be impossible to repeal the Second Amendment, and a long western civilizations history with a right to bear arms. Finally one can see the conflict of views dealing with the Second Amendment, but one would also see that repealing the amendment wouldn't solve the problem facing our society. The controversy of this issue that has the potential to pulverize this country is why it is such a good topic to discuss, people should be better informed and make a decision based on fact and not fiction.
Many advocates of the limitations of guns can quote numerous examples of increasing violence...

...head: Deadly Consequence of GunControl
APA Format
Word Count = 2,338
Deadly Consequence of GunControl
Policy Proposal Paper
Deadly Consequence of GunControlGuncontrol has been on the forefronts of debate since the 1960’s when there were some high profile shootings. The increase of gun violence since the 1980’s has just increased the argument over who should be allowed to own and carry weapons. The Second Amendment is the biggest stumbling block in this debate because people interpreted it differently. The one side argues that it states that we have the right to bear arms, but the other side says that it doesn’t pertain to us anymore in the modern era. Politicians love to use the idea that removing legal guns will drastically reduce suicides, assassinations, gang-violence, school shootings, accidental child deaths, and general murders. They don’t consider the fact that someone that wants to kill themselves will do it anyway they can, or a college kid trying to tear up his school will just blow it up if he cannot find a gun. Criminals vary rarely use registered guns to commit crimes, they use illegally acquired weapons. Guncontrol only protects the criminals and the image of the government’s control over the people. The controversial movement...

...I believe that control on firearms will reduce crime. But I don't believe in taking away firearms from law abiding citizens is the answer to guncontrol. We need more regulations put into place on who, when, how and where guns can be purchased. I don't believe you should be able to go to a weekend rinky dink gun show and be able to walk out with a weapon regardless of make or caliber. I think that you should not be allowed to legally buy a firearm, or any accessory for said firearm until the age of 21. Pawn shops and places like Walmart should not be allowed to sell firearms above a certain caliber, or semi autos. Bolt action rifles, shot guns and revolvers would be fine at sporting good stores and such. Specialized weapons such as semi autos like the Ak-47 or Ar-15 should only be sold by authorized stores and retailers. There is no reason why any person should be allowed to own weapons such as .50 cal sniper rifles or a lot the other weapons that are so popular in video games and with the military. There should be more extensive research into the individual and the people that live with said person before a weapon can be purchased. You can still in most states buy a weapon even though you live with a felon. Not acceptable. I believe that law enforcement and military should be held to the same standards as civilians. Just because you are a veteran does not mean you can walk out same day...